Maybe we could all--50 shaders and anti 50-shaders and the uncommited either way--back off for a while and let the kerfuffle go the way of kerfuffles?

Yes--a sensible voice in the wilderness. But even as we say that and for future threads, there's room for everyone's opinions. At the same time, we can choose to ignore those threads that don't have any personal appeal rather than throwing stones at them.

Yes. Or demanding that discussion be shut down. I can't express how chilling that notion is to me._________________Diana

My two cents, as this thread has veered into OT territory, making my comment relevant:

I have not posted here in several months, for much the same reasons that Eliza, Kristie and Rosario have articulated. I thought that in many ways my silence, and that of others, spoke for itself; but I'm no longer sure it has - so let me be very clear:

1. AAR has been a tremendous resource and community in the past. At the moment, I feel it is going in the wrong direction in both respects. This is not irreversible.

2. However, AAR cannot be improved if management continues to be so completely uninterested and non-receptive to feedback, suggestions and criticism. Sandy's contributions to this thread are an example of this. The blog post some months ago asking for feedback and "how AAR is doing' is another. Any comment that is not of the "AAR is the bestest" variety is either ignored or shot down; there was never any followup to that blog post, for instance, despite people taking the time to make some very good suggestions.

3. Yes, it is your website to do with as you see fit. But if your goal - as per Sandy's comment in the past - is not to develop content, and the forums have become narrow in focus and enjoyable to few, what exactly is AAR management trying to accomplish? More page views?

4. I'm not surprised that Kristie and Rosario have weighed in. Both are successful and interesting bloggers, and AAR, especially the forums, has had a distinct anti-blog vibe for some time. It's unpleasant for bloggers, and it's unpleasant for blog readers. Not all of us view AAR as a one-stop place for romance news and views.

5. I'm a regular on other forums, and I know snark when I see it. The problem with the AAR forums is not that they've become snarky; at least snark can be funny. What's going on here is a small number of people who choose to be unpleasant to others and take over the discussion, which is not at all the same thing. I also feel that the forums are not moderated as well as they could be.

6. The use of the word flounce conjures drama queens and two year olds having a tantrum. The people who have expressed critical views in this thread are neither. It would be much easier to just ignore AAR, but many of us are long-time readers and posters who are concerned about where this website is heading. This sort of involvement should be welcomed, not dismissed.

7. AAR has done a lot of good work over the years, and has been a gateway to the romance community for many of us. AAR management was given a great brand and resource when Laurie Gold left. Don't throw it away.

If my post is tl;dr for anyone, I understand. But I feel this needed to be said.

Where have I said that AAR does not want to develop new content? That is certainly not true and I am most sorry that you have gotten that impression.

And I am happy to be the whipping girl for "what's wrong with AAR," but, honestly, all three of us work full-time in addition to AAR so we do all we do in our spare time. I can assure you that suggestions are certainly taken seriously and plans for new content are underway, as are plans to update the Special Title Lists. It just takes time. More time than you would like, obviously, but there it is. We all have jobs.

I am sorry that the word "flounce" offended you, but we certainly have our share of drama queens at AAR and I thought the word apt._________________Sandy AAR
Publisher and Senior Editor

I am happy to be the whipping girl for "what's wrong with AAR," but, honestly, all three of us work full-time in addition to AAR so we do all we do in our spare time. I can assure you that suggestions are certainly taken seriously and plans for new content are underway, as are plans to update the Special Title Lists. It just takes time. More time than you would like, obviously, but there it is. We all have jobs.

I am sorry that the word "flounce" offended you, but we certainly have our share of drama queens at AAR and I thought the word apt.

I am sorry, Sandy, that you choose to interpret constructive criticism and people's genuine efforts to make AAR work better as a personal attack on you. It's also unfortunate that you chose not to address the substance of my comment, as well as other people's. And I can't say I agree with your description of any of the posters here as drama queens; I have my issues with AAR, obviously, but dealing with drama queens is not among them.

I really don't have anything to add, and you seem disinclined to continue the conversation with those of us who have used this thread as a starting point for a broader discussion about AAR. I don't think it's the right place for me anymore, which is disappointing, but happily I have other interests and I guess I will spend more of my time on those.

I'm not sure where to post, here, in the new Potpourri thread or over at the 50Shades thread.

Here goes nothing -- just some random thoughts --

1. The complaints about the endless 50Shades threads at the top of the board. Let's be fair: it's hard to find a blog or a website or an anything anywhere that isn't talking about 50Shades. Yesterday NBC talked about the Australian women's swim team reading the books, before switching to Victoria Beckham mentioning she had given the book to her mum. Heroes and Heartbreakers, Happily Ever After ... fill in the blank and insert the Big Box Blog you read most frequently, they all have a 50Shades article or post or mention every day or so.

2. AAR has had an occasional 50Shades blog but the comments are written by users, me included. Has anyone forgotten the Suz Brockmann thread that went to 168 pages? The only reason AAR keeps chopping up the thread is to make it more manageable.

3. AAR has a variety of folks who manage the site and write the reviews. I've been slapped down (that is a METAPHOR!) a few times. So what -- I pulled up my big girl panties, attempted to understand what I had done wrong--or what I had done that wasn't in accordance with how things work--and moved on.

4. Censorship is something I don't like and telling people what they can continue to talk about and write about is not something I like (other than fire in a crowded buildling). Obviously tons of people are interested in the 50Shades phenom--I know I am. Who will direct, who will star, blah blah blah. I'm interested in other things too. But I like the comments and I read them.

5. So what's the problem?

Edited to fix spelling mistake

Last edited by janet w on Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:12 pm; edited 1 time in total

I am sorry, Sandy, that you choose to interpret constructive criticism and people's genuine efforts to make AAR work better as a personal attack on you. It's also unfortunate that you chose not to address the substance of my comment, as well as other people's. And I can't say I agree with your description of any of the posters here as drama queens; I have my issues with AAR, obviously, but dealing with drama queens is not among them. ....I really don't have anything to add, and you seem disinclined to continue the conversation with those of us who have used this thread as a starting point for a broader discussion about AAR.....

I agree with this completely. And I believe Kristie(J), Rosario, and Yulie have already clearly suggested what needs to happen on the boards as "starting points" for change; more or other suggestions are fine but only if the concerns already made hereare heard and addressed first. They shouldn't need to be added to another thread when they've been stated here already.

dick's suggestion was fine and Sandy wholly embraced it, only to soon after that defend her drama queens comment, which was both offensive and rather ironic at the same time. If the tone is to change here, or anything else for that matter, it's a key leadership principle that for change to actually occur that the example has to be set and demonstrated by the leaders first.

I agree with this completely. And I believe Kristie(J), Rosario, and Yulie have already clearly suggested what needs to happen on the boards as "starting points" for change; more or other suggestions are fine but only if the concerns already made hereare heard and addressed first. They shouldn't need to be added to another thread when they've been stated

I don't think Sandy was asking for a repeat of what has already been stated here, what she said was that she felt this thread was no longer the proper place for it and started another thread for just that. She is accommodating the posters that would like to give feedback while trying to get this thread back on topic and correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the requests to have better moderation on the boads? If she's going to get lectured, ignored or slammed every time she tries it's pointless. I don't think as posters here it's our part to dictate how she chooses to address or accommodate suggestions.

Janet, thanks so much for your post!

Linda_________________"The Bookshop has a thousand books, all colors, hues and tinges, and every cover is a door that turns on magic hinges." ~ Nancy Byrd Turner

Kristie, I don't know where you get the idea that I am taking over the boards in any way. I post on the Fifty Shades thread often.

Oh Xina - please tell me you are pulling my leg with that question. Please tell me that because surely you can't be so blind otherwise._________________KristieJ.blogspot.ca
"reading is dreaming with open eyes" - Yoyo